Renshaw v New South Wales Lotteries Corporation Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1661

Renshaw v New South Wales Lotteries Corporation Pty Ltd [2019] NSWSC 1661

The defendants were substantially successful on the strike out motion and most evidence, submissions, directions and hearing costs were directed to matters on which they succeeded, including the contractual claim, extension of time issues, and related evidentiary materials. However, they were unsuccessful in striking out the plaintiff's claims under the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). Justice to the parties therefore required apportionment, with the defendants to receive 80% of their costs of and incidental to the motion, including the costs of Mr McNamara's affidavits. Because amendment would require a new defence after earlier pleaded claims were...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Costs / On the Papers After Reserved Costs of Defendants' Notice of Motion Filed on 5 December 2017
Outcome
Defendants' costs application allowed in part; defendants awarded 80% of their costs of and incidental to the motion, including the costs of Mr McNamara's affidavits, and costs thrown away arising from any further amended statement of claim.
Legal Topics
['costs Following the Event' 'interlocutory Applications and Reserved Costs' 'strike Out Application' 'apportionment of Costs' 'costs Thrown Away by Amendment']
['civil Procedure' 'costs'] ['costs Following the Event' 'interlocutory Applications and Reserved Costs' 'strike Out Application' 'apportionment of Costs' 'costs Thrown Away by Amendment']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Costs / On the Papers After Reserved Costs of Defendants' Notice of Motion Filed on 5 December 2017

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the defendants should recover costs of and incidental to their strike out motion after being substantially but not wholly successful.' 'Whether costs should be apportioned because the defendants were unsuccessful in striking out the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth) claims.' 'Whether the plaintiff should pay costs thrown away arising from any further amended statement of claim.']

Ratio Decidendi

The defendants were substantially successful on the strike out motion and most evidence, submissions, directions and hearing costs were directed to matters on which they succeeded, including the contractual claim, extension of time issues, and related evidentiary materials. However, they were unsuccessful in striking out the plaintiff's claims under the Fair Trading Act 1987 (NSW) and the Trade Practices Act 1974 (Cth). Justice to the parties therefore required apportionment, with the defendants to receive 80% of their costs of and incidental to the motion, including the costs of Mr McNamara's affidavits. Because amendment would require a new defence after earlier pleaded claims were...

Court Disposition

Defendants' costs application allowed in part; defendants awarded 80% of their costs of and incidental to the motion, including the costs of Mr McNamara's affidavits, and costs thrown away arising from any further amended statement of claim.

Orders

  • ['The defendants shall bring in short minutes of order reflecting this judgment within 7 days of the publication of this judgment.' 'The defendants shall have 80% of their costs of and incidental to the motion, including the costs of the affidavits of Mr McNamara.' "The plaintiff is to pay the defendants' costs...